Saro Princess a patrol bomber?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saro Princess a patrol bomber?
I'll be asking for advice re the Princess over the next few weeks, since I'm writing about it for Air & Space Smithsonian.
My first question: I just read that the airplane was originally intended to be "a patrol craft," which I assume would mean it was to have at least some weapons-carrying capability.
Assuming that statement is true--that it was originally intended to be a warplane--what on earth could have been the reasoning behind postulating that a long-range maritime patrol craft had to be that big and have that many engines? Catalinas and Mariners certainly seemed to do the job well for the U.S. and Sunderlands and Emilys elsewhere...
Any theories?
My first question: I just read that the airplane was originally intended to be "a patrol craft," which I assume would mean it was to have at least some weapons-carrying capability.
Assuming that statement is true--that it was originally intended to be a warplane--what on earth could have been the reasoning behind postulating that a long-range maritime patrol craft had to be that big and have that many engines? Catalinas and Mariners certainly seemed to do the job well for the U.S. and Sunderlands and Emilys elsewhere...
Any theories?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: South Coast
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Sir,someone has given you a "bum steer". It was never designed as a patrol aircraft,rather as a replacement for the Flying boats in operation at that time by IA/BOAC. It was a passenger plane pure and simple. I had the pleasure of a conducted tour at Cowes,Isle of Wight on completion of my course on the Sunderland.
Yes, would certainly be interested to know where that info has originated. As Old Hairy says the Princess was designed from day one as a carrier of passengers, albeit on grand scale.
Planemike
PS Old Hairy, were you at Calshot in 1952?
Planemike
PS Old Hairy, were you at Calshot in 1952?
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 110 Likes
on
77 Posts
I would suggest you do some research into the publications of the late, and much lamented, Dick Stratton.... which may well answer your question and more besides.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saunders-Roe Flying Boat Projects
1857801792, T.Buttler, Br. Secret Projects - Fighters & Bombers, 1935-50, Midland/Ian Allan, 1950, P.144. 0851302203, K.J.Meekcoms/E.B.Morgan, The Br. A/c Specs. File, Air-Britain,1994, P.373.
sw: You are quite right that Catalina gave remarkable endurance. Size, however, seemed important to RAF, so Short/Saro S.35 Shetland was funded in 11/1940, becoming the largest UK beast when flown in 1944. Evidently useless, scheming its replacement began in 1944. When funded 5/1946 as SR.45 the customer, MoS, had Requirements from both BSAAC (3 ordered to MoS Spec. 10/46; 4 added 1948 for BOAC) and RAF Coastal Command (Spec. R.36/46 as Saro P.104, amended to R.2/48, Saro P.162) for a prospective need for 80. That continued to provide "research" funding to Saro until 1955.
1857801792, T.Buttler, Br. Secret Projects - Fighters & Bombers, 1935-50, Midland/Ian Allan, 1950, P.144. 0851302203, K.J.Meekcoms/E.B.Morgan, The Br. A/c Specs. File, Air-Britain,1994, P.373.
sw: You are quite right that Catalina gave remarkable endurance. Size, however, seemed important to RAF, so Short/Saro S.35 Shetland was funded in 11/1940, becoming the largest UK beast when flown in 1944. Evidently useless, scheming its replacement began in 1944. When funded 5/1946 as SR.45 the customer, MoS, had Requirements from both BSAAC (3 ordered to MoS Spec. 10/46; 4 added 1948 for BOAC) and RAF Coastal Command (Spec. R.36/46 as Saro P.104, amended to R.2/48, Saro P.162) for a prospective need for 80. That continued to provide "research" funding to Saro until 1955.
Stepwilk, You may find this interesting, its an article in Flight by the Princess designer:
1952 | 0651 | Flight Archive
These pictures linked on the Secret Projects site referred to by tornadoken are well worth a look.
Untitled Normal Page
I'm going to email the link to my uncle, as he worked at Saunders Roe and was a flight test observer on the Princess. He may know if there was ever any mention of a patrol bomber requirement.
1952 | 0651 | Flight Archive
These pictures linked on the Secret Projects site referred to by tornadoken are well worth a look.
Untitled Normal Page
I'm going to email the link to my uncle, as he worked at Saunders Roe and was a flight test observer on the Princess. He may know if there was ever any mention of a patrol bomber requirement.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, of course I don't know how reliable the information is, which is why I came here, as always.
It's from the book "Sea Wings," by Edward Jablonski, who is certainly a reputable writer...
And Mechta, thanks, I already have the Flight article.
It's from the book "Sea Wings," by Edward Jablonski, who is certainly a reputable writer...
And Mechta, thanks, I already have the Flight article.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sw: BSAAC, very wet routes, was happy to contemplate a mixed fleet, land and marine (Princess/Tudor/Comet 1, no doubt BOAC's Medium Range Empire to be Britannia). BOAC did not exit marine until 1950. US had Mars, France, Late.631. The received wisdom dismissal of commercial marine, as destroyed by wartime concrete, is, I suggest, trite. It was operating economics: DC-4/L-049 were game-changing, even before DC-6/L-1049. For MR, Neptune delivered loiter/endurance matching any marine type, but readily maintainable. Did any ASW concept ever involve wallowing silently on deep-ocean swell?
MoS probably continued to fund Saro MR "study", 1952-55, simply to sustain a team-in-being while resolving whether RAF would take up their rocket-interceptor schemes. That is also why Saro in 1951/2 was given the fabrication of Valiant nose and Viscount wing: any production run for a big-Saro would have been beyond Cowes' capacity and was to be joint with Vickers-Armstrongs.
MoS probably continued to fund Saro MR "study", 1952-55, simply to sustain a team-in-being while resolving whether RAF would take up their rocket-interceptor schemes. That is also why Saro in 1951/2 was given the fabrication of Valiant nose and Viscount wing: any production run for a big-Saro would have been beyond Cowes' capacity and was to be joint with Vickers-Armstrongs.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I would suggest you do some research into the publications of the late, and much lamented, Dick Stratton...."
Certainly I know who Dick Stratton was, but I didn't know he'd done any books. Or are they magazine articles to which you're referring?
Certainly I know who Dick Stratton was, but I didn't know he'd done any books. Or are they magazine articles to which you're referring?
